Cover not available

Article published In: Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 40:1 (2017) ► pp.59–89

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

On the origin of Gamale Kham labial-palatal approximants

 | Payap University
Published online: 3 November 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.40.1.03wil
Abstract
The development of the Gamale Kham labial-palatal approximants /ɥ/ and /ɥ̊/ has previously been attributed to the loss of the Proto-Kham initial *p- or the coda *-p. The vowels /i/ and /e/ which occurred in the adjacent syllable nucleus were rounded, resulting in the front rounded vowels /y/ and /ø/. Following this development, /w/ and /j/ merged to /ɥ/ in Gamale and Eastern Parbate Kham (Watters, David E. 2002. A Grammar of Kham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; 2004. A Dictionary of Kham: Taka Dialect. (A Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal). Kathmandu: Tribhuvan University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; 2005. An overview of Kham-Magar languages and dialects. In Yogendra Yadava, Govinda Bhattarai, Ram Raj Lohani, Balaram Prasain & Krishna Parajuli (eds), Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics, 339–374. Kathmandu: Linguistic Society of Nepal.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). This study evaluates this theory and suggests two alternative explanations: that Proto-Kham may have had either two front rounded vowels *y and *ø, or a *ɥ phoneme. In the second case, the work refers to a possible correspondence between a Proto-Kham *ɥ and the Proto-Tibeto-Burman complex *jw.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Phonology
    • 2.1Overview of Gamale Kham phonology
    • 2.2Central approximants in Gamale Kham
    • 2.3Front rounded elements in other Kham varieties
  • 3.Two previous hypotheses
    • 3.1Background
    • 3.2Proto-Kham *p-
    • 3.3Proto-Kham *-p
    • 3.4A further observation
  • 4.Alternative interpretation
    • 4.1Shifting of distinctive features
    • 4.2Option A: Proto-Kham *y and *ø
    • 4.3Option B: Proto-Kham *ɥ
  • 5.Conclusion and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (28)
References
Benedict, Paul K. 1972. Sino-Tibetan: A Conspectus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boon, Sara A. n.d. The phonology of Maikoti Kham. Ms, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu.
Bradley, David. 2002. The subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman. In Christopher Beckwith (Ed.), Tibeto-Burman Medieval Languages, 73–112. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caughley, Ross C. 1982. The Syntax and Morphology of the Verb in Chepang [Pacific Linguistics Series B 84]. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000. Dictionary of Chepang: A Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal [Pacific Linguistics 502]. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grunow-Hårsta, Karen. 2008. A Descriptive Grammar of Two Major Magar Dialects of Nepal: Tanahu and Syangja Magar, Vol. I1. PhD dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Henderson, Eugénie J. A. 1985. Feature shuffling in Southeast Asian languages. In Suriya Ratanakul, David D. Thomas & Suwilai Premsrirat (eds), Southeast Asian Linguistic Studies Presented to André G. Haudricourt, 1–22. Bangkok: Institute of Language and Culture for Rural Development, Mahidol University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hock, Hans Henrich. 1991. Principles of Historical Linguistics, 2nd revised and updated edition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1973. Tonogenesis in Southeast Asia. In Larry M. Hyman (ed.), Consonant Types and Tone [Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 1], 71–95. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1985. God and the Sino-Tibetan copula, with some good news concerning selected Tibeto-Burman rhymes. Journal of Asian and African Studies 291: 1–81.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1989. Tone, intonation, and sound symbolism in Lahu: Loading the syllable canon. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 12(2): 147–163.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1992. Following the marrow: Two parallel Sino-Tibetan etymologies. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 15(1): 159–177.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mazaudon, Martine. 1973. Phonologie Tamang: Etude phonologique de dialecte Tamang de Risiangku (Langue Tibéto-Birmane de Népal). Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. An outline of the historical phonology of the dialects of Nar-Phu (Nepal). Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 19(1): 103–114.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michaud, A. 2012. Monosyllabicization: Patterns of evolution in Asian Languages. In Timothy Stolz, Nicole Nau & Cornelia Stroh (eds), Monosyllables: From Phonology to Typology, 115–130. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ringe, Don & Joseph F. Eska. 2013. Historical Linguistics: Toward a Twenty-first Century Reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shepherd, Gary. n.d. Magar-English Dictionary. Ms. Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus (STEDT). <[URL]>
Sun, Jackson T-S. 1993. A Historical-comparative Study of the Tani (Mirish) Branch in Tibeto-Burman. PhD dissertation, University of California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham & Hector Javkin. 1975. An acoustic explanation of a sound change: *-ap to -o, -at to -e, and *-ak to -æ. Journal of Phonetics 31: 161–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watters, David E. 2002. A Grammar of Kham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003a. Kham. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds), The Sino-Tibetan languages [Routledge Language Family Series], 683–704. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003b. Some preliminary observations on the relationship between Kham, Magar (and Chepang). Paper presented at the 36th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics. La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
2004. A Dictionary of Kham: Taka Dialect. (A Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal). Kathmandu: Tribhuvan University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. An overview of Kham-Magar languages and dialects. In Yogendra Yadava, Govinda Bhattarai, Ram Raj Lohani, Balaram Prasain & Krishna Parajuli (eds), Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics, 339–374. Kathmandu: Linguistic Society of Nepal.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilde, Christopher Pekka. 2011. Observations on the phonology of Gamāle Kham. Himalayan Linguistics 10(1): 273–290.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. Gamale Kham phonology revisited, with Devanagari-based orthography and lexicon. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistic Society 91: 130–199.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. A phonological comparison of Gamale, Sheram and Ghusbang – three Kham varieties. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistic Society 10(1): 67–90.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue